Never apologise. You played the second part once through because that was how you saw the artistic direction of the tune going. Nicely held together. It's great when everything flows. Nice sound to that melodeon, as well.

Thank you Greg. It’s a lovely piece but that one line of arpeggios is a bit of a bugger to smooth out. Worth all the effort though

Going through all the recordings, now that I have done mine, I have to say that I find this, played at this speed, very beautiful indeed. I have learnt a lesson here, having spent the last three weeks falling over my fingers, while trying to get it faster and faster, when really, a slower speed has much beauty. Lovely, thank you

This is a lovely tune. I'm surprised that nobody has pointed out the obvious mistake in bar 8 of the second part in all three ABC transcriptions posted on the first page. Part 2 bar 8 as given in Clive's Bm version is

AB de fe

when clearly it should be

AB ce fa

which is what most people posting are actually playing, and it is certainly what Paul Young is playing (down a tone, in Am) on the clip I have just been watching.

Incidentally this sequence of notes strongly suggests an F#m chord, as do several other places in the tune. I don't agree with the suggestion that was made that the tune is modal tune and therefore F#m should not be expected. Aeolian mode if you like, but a straight minor key tune really. Those of you who have no F#m chord don't know what you're missing in Bm tunes!

I'm surprised that nobody has pointed out the obvious mistake in bar 8 of the second part in all three ABC transcriptions posted on the first page....Incidentally this sequence of notes strongly suggests an F#m chord, as do several other places in the tune. I don't agree with the suggestion that was made that the tune is modal tune and therefore F#m should not be expected. Aeolian mode if you like, but a straight minor key tune really. Those of you who have no F#m chord don't know what you're missing in Bm tunes!

Well, you are right, but I'd extend that to every ABC notation copy of the tune that's been posted so far either here or in the poll thread has been conceptually speaking 'wrong' in one way or another, including the one I shared. There's the option to buy a tune book with the 'correct' score in it, and that helped me figure out all the places I had been going 'wrong', but after that... it seemed a little unethical to buy it, fix all the mistakes and share out that ABC, or even heavily draw attention to certain details. Perhaps the provided ABC was transcribed from some recording we don't know about? In terms of attention to details of recorded performances by Dave Shepherd... idk, so like as best as I can tell, I'm also the only person who's made a submission that repeats the final half of the B music at the end (apologies to anyone if I missed your recording, this tune really speaks to me so I've tried to listen to every submission), so, perhaps there's another 'obvious mistake' that everyone's made, since every(reasonably)official recording I've seen/heard ends in this manner. But, TotM is about learning, adapting and performing a tune through your own lens (& mostly for ones own benefit), so, I dunno? I don't mean/want to imply anyone's performance is wrong, this was just a detail that mattered to me.

Also, I think the suggestion you're disagreeing with, that because the tune is modal that F#m 'is not expected', is probably based on a misunderstanding? Based on conversations I've had with some of my local band members who were taught to play music by some kind of teacher at some point (often in the distant past), some of them reported being taught that 'harmonic minor' was 'minor', so, perhaps that could have been the purpose behind the describing of the tune as 'modal', as this tune clearly is not harmonic minor. But, since the Aeolian mode and Natural minor are the same progressions, to say it's 'straight' minor surely is to say it's modal, and vice versa, right? *shrug* That's probably a semantics issue and a black hole of conversation though...

The more important takeaway is that, any progression, including natural minor, that does not include the leading tone (the note one semi tone below the tonic note), does not have the same functional harmony rules in its diatonic chords that make I IV V so effective. The v chord, F#m, would definitely be a perfectly fine chord to find in a B natural minor tune, but, we can fairly comfortably live without it. I believe it was far more the concept of I IV V breaking down that was being alluded to, rather than that F#m would be somehow wrong for a B minor tune. You're certainly not incorrect in your assertion though, F#m would be a banging chord to have access to!

However, if it's of any comfort to anyone, I can say that while the notes may imply it, the score as written in More Scores never uses the 5th scale degree.

More importantly, the melody differs in bar 8 of the B music, where the BZB book's G minor score notes are FGACDFWhereas the melnet abc G minor equivalent would be FG BC DC. The authentic tune has a different rising shape leading up to the top note of the arpeggio in the next bar.Just thought that if we're busy learning this, we might as well respect DS's intentions.

Hi Gena. My apologies to Jack Humphreys - I skimmed the thread but not carefully enough. I wasn't familiar with the tune when I first ran through it a while ago, using the ABCs posted here, and that bar immediately struck me as off without having heard any of the renditions. (I wouldn't care if that actually was the composer's version - I wouldn't play those notes! )

As to the ethics of correcting a bad version of a tune published for all to see just because it's in a book you can buy - well, if you were the composer of a tune, would you prefer to think that people all over the world were learning a setting containing a bar that made little musical sense - and assuming that's what you had written?

PS Greg - of course I agree. But if you are going to post a score here for people to use as a reference, it should be reasonably accurate. I don't regard the bar B8 in question as a "minor faff" - to me it's a howler.

as best as I can tell, I'm also the only person who's made a submission that repeats the final half of the B music at the end

Indeed - well spotted!The three 'official' samples you linked to were all Blowzabella (or members of...) so the players are obviously all used to playing it that way countless times. I don't see that as an issue with playing the tune right or wrong, but as an arrangement decision.

Quote

Perhaps the provided ABC was transcribed from some recording we don't know about?

Given that DS is on record as quite prickly about his tunes being played incorrectly, I'd assume(a) that the Blowzabella book is correct and (b) he'd prefer it played that way.

My feeling is that if a tune is written by someone who is ok with it being 'covered' in the Totm fashion, then we should be ok to assume that we don't want 10 identical interpretations - at least I don't. If someone has learnt something incorrectly by mistake then it's ok to ask if that is their intention, but if they've chosen to play it that way, then it should also be fine to allow their version. We don't have to like it, but I'd be put off joining in future tunes by an assumption that I have to do it one way or another.I've respected composer's intentions for years in the classical world, and I'm rather enjoying not being that person on the melodeon (although of course I wish I could play the box better).We might insist that the tempo has to be a certain way, or the harmonies have to be such and such (which might not always be possible), or the structure...Then we might find that we get 2 people a month brave enough to brave the risk of 'corrections'. I seem to remember playing neither the official version, nor the one which dips at the end, but maybe in that key it would be FG, BbCD F. That's what I meant to play, and I'm perfectly happy leaving it there.I get that this is a live tune by a living composer, but in time honoured fashion keeping tradition alive is best achieved by fanning the flames rather than preserving the ashes.It's entirely possible that I've misunderstood the argument here - apologies if I have.For the very few souls who fancy playing a tune I have written, knock yourselves out, change anything you like.

Having now read Anahata's comments about Dave being prickly - I don't know what to think, perhaps we shouldn't have such tunes as Totm, or at least not without their official published version, but that is a can of worms. It's a tune I like playing, but I'm never going to play it in public, and I've removed my Youtube version, warts and all, to avoid that criticism.

Dave Shepherd's best known objection is to the way WilliamTaylor's Tabletop Hornpipe has been mangled by melodeon players in a number of Morris and Molly teams. I sympathise in that case, because the tune has had nice distinctive features flattened out into something much more bland, partly because of the melodeon's limitations. In that instance, the most frequently played version has taken on a life of its own.

Dave Shepherd's best known objection is to the way WilliamTaylor's Tabletop Hornpipe has been mangled by melodeon players in a number of Morris and Molly teams. I sympathise in that case, because the tune has had nice distinctive features flattened out into something much more bland, partly because of the melodeon's limitations. In that instance, the most frequently played version has taken on a life of its own.

As I recall, Dave Shepherd has two main objections to how WTTH has been mangled: (i) being played in D/G melodeon friendly E minor, rather than the original G minor, and (ii) people not realising that the B-music has two subtly different halves and only playing the first half both times round.

Personally I have no problem with (i). I think it is fine to transpose a tune to a key which is friendly to a particular instrument, if it enables the tune to be played rather than not played. Bach did it all the time.

With (ii) I think it is a shame that the B-music is so often simplified (some might even say 'dumbed down') which is then perpetuated by other musicians learning/hearing the simplified version, not knowing any different. The original B-music, with its 'nice distinctive features' as Anahata puts it, is actually perfectly melodeon-friendly. It's just a case of looking up and/or listening to the original version and learning it properly. You end up with a far richer tune as a result.

I'm pretty sure we've discussed this tune before on this forum. The folk process of tune evolution doesn't always work for the best, sorry to say.

Given that DS is on record as quite prickly about his tunes being played incorrectly, I'd assume(a) that the Blowzabella book is correct and (b) he'd prefer it played that way.

I mean, I would assume that too. Except that so far as I can tell, the chords for William Taylor's in the reprinted versions of Encyclopedia Blowzabellica do not appear to match up with the chords played by Becky Price in this video on Dave's youtube channel which he describes as a definitive version. Everything's complicated forever, hooray! I have no answers, though, only observations.

I'm going to go research software licenses, but, for music compositions...

Except that so far as I can tell, the chords for William Taylor's in the reprinted versions of Encyclopedia Blowzabellica do not appear to match up with the chords played by Becky Price in this video on Dave's youtube channel which he describes as a definitive version....

I suspect that Dave Shepherd, being a fiddle player, probably did not originally specify chords to go with WTTH. I may be wrong though!

PS Greg - of course I agree. But if you are going to post a score here for people to use as a reference, it should be reasonably accurate. I don't regard the bar B8 in question as a "minor faff" - to me it's a howler.

I stand chastened.Perhaps I should have made it clearer that the transcription was not my own. It was the only one I could locate at the time and I should have made the that clear when I posted it. I didn't realise it had two wrong notes in it.

Once you release an animal into the wild you cannot control what will happen to it.Ditto a tune...

Yes, I know and I agree with your reasoning. But with a tune, if it's really that important to you as a composer exactly how it should be played (as is the case with WTTH), then I think it's worthwhile making sure that when it's released it is accompanied by written music notation and perhaps a recording. At least it might stand a fighting chance of being played as you intended by more musicians.

Conversely, if you are more relaxed about your tunes, it's interesting to see how they develop in the hands of other musicians. Cue one of my own tunes 'Trip to Stowmarket' - it's a pretty basic tune with no real hidden subtleties. It is already being played by other musicians and has even appeared in a popular East Anglian album, which is most gratifying. But all the renditions I've heard are slightly different from how I first conceived it - which is OK!

I hadn't actually registered that the ABCs had been supplied by you, Greg! Sorry for the hard wording.

None taken . Fair criticism.

I would still recommend taking any transcription with lots of NaCl, though. There are countless examples. Captain Francis O'Neill's little books comes to mind. I believe he fell out with James O'Neill big time over "weaknesses" in his transcriptions .

I remember rushing out to buy tunes books by my favourite bands back in the 60s/70s and being discombobulated when the transcriptions weren't just like the records.